On Monday 19 March 2012, Roland Stigge wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On 19/03/12 22:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > There is already a driver for the isp1301 otg part in the kernel, I don't
> > think we want to add another one.
> >
> > From what I can tell, this shares a common ancestry with the omap version
> > but has diverged quite a bit. The best solution would really be to
> > bring the two back together and let them share a common base driver,
> > with the lpc32xx and omap specific bits in another file.
>
> Yes, it's a good idea to share code where possible and consolidate into
> one driver.
>
> Please consider:
>
> The LPC32xx driver is actually using only 3 functions via isp1301:
>
> isp1301_udc_configure()
> isp1301_set_powerstate()
> isp1301_pullup_set()
>
> The first of those is LPC32xx specific. The power setting function is
> also done differently in isp1301_omap's power_up()/power_down() ("board
> specific"). For the pullups, there is not (yet?) a dedicated API in the
> OMAP driver, but it's really only two small I2C commands.
>
> Are you still sure it's worth it to use a common driver when there is
> hardly shared code?
No, I guess I should have looked closed. I found a few common functions
and assumed that this would be the same driver.
> Maybe the right thing is a common low-level isp1301 interface defining
> all the registers and providing low-level (I2C) access functions,
> leaving all the "higher level"/"board specific" functions up to the
> existing drivers?
>
> (I guess you meant drivers/usb/otg/isp1301_omap.c ?)
Yes, that sounds like a very good idea. Can you describe which part of
the function isp1301 does? It's not clear how the layering between
that and the platform driver should end up.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
